Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 24NNCV04844, Date: 2025-06-04 Tentative Ruling



Case Number: 24NNCV04844    Hearing Date: June 4, 2025    Dept: 3

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - NORTHEAST DISTRICT

 

ANGELICA J. VARGAS,

                    Plaintiff(s),

          vs.

 

LA AUTO CENTER, LLC, et al.,

 

                    Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

      CASE NO.: 24NNCV04844

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO DEEM REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION (SET ONE) ADMITTED

 

Dept. 3

8:30 a.m.

June 4, 2025

 

On April 17, 2025, plaintiff Angelica J. Vargas (“Plaintiff”) filed this motion to deem Requests for Admission (Set One), propounded to defendant LA Auto Center, LLC (“Defendant”) admitted. The requests for admission were served on January 27, 2028. (Glassey Decl., ¶ 1.) Defendant’s responses were initially due by February 28, 2025, but to date, no responses have been served. (Ibid.)

Where a party fails to timely respond to a request for admission, the propounding party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (b).) The court shall grant a motion to deem admitted requests for admissions, “unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

Defendant did not oppose this motion and it is undisputed that Defendant failed to serve responses to Plaintiff’s Requests for Admission. Accordingly, the motion to deem admitted is GRANTED.

Where a party fails to provide a timely response to requests for admission, “[i]t is mandatory that the court impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated this motion.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

Plaintiff requests sanctions in the amount of $3,248 for having to bring this motion, consisting of 3 hours to draft the motion at an hourly rate of $595, and 1.8 hours to review an opposition brief, draft a reply brief, and attend a hearing. Plaintiff also requests $297.50 for the half hour spent sending emails meeting and conferring with defense counsel, as well as $72.50 and $22 for filing the motion and reply papers, respectively. The amount requested is excessive given the motion’s simplicity – the memorandum of points and authorities is only 3 pages long and does not include any extensive legal analysis. Therefore, the request for sanctions is GRANTED and imposed against Defendant in the reduced amount of $667.5, consisting of 1 hour at counsel’s hourly rate of $595 and $72.50 in filing costs, to be paid within 20 days of the date of this Order.

Moving party to give notice.

Dated this 4th day of June 2025

 

 

 

 

William A. Crowfoot

Judge of the Superior Court

 

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at ALHDEPT3@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter. Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue. If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.

 





Website by Triangulus